Re: Decentralized reliable instant messaging?
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:05:02 -0400
Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> wrote:
> >
>
> You have a much too simplistic view of todays anti-spam measures.
>
> If an smtp server tries to deliver a messages, usually the first the
> receiving server does, during the helo, checking if the sending
> server is blacklisted. If blacklisted any attempt to deliver any mail
> will be denied and the sender will receive a proper 5XX error message.
Yes, certainly, though a check of the sending IP DNS and a complete list
of valid recipients stop a lot more spam than my blacklists do. Even
requiring a thirty-second timeout stops a lot, no legitimate mail
server minds waiting that long.
>
> If the initial test passes though and the mail is accepted the mail
> has been "reliably" delivered. If any additional filter decide that
> this is spam then -again- we are dealing with an technical solution
> to a social problem.
The social problem of the existence of thieves and idiot marketing
people. I suspect a social solution to this social problem will not
come in my lifetime.
> Still e-mail is fairly reliable.
> The issue as always is the overcommunication inflation which pretty
> much created the current situation. Finetuning the system to avoid
> fals positives while minimizing spam is an art.
Indeed, which is why I pretty well gave up on content analysis. My
usual email client dumps a few really egregious subjects, but otherwise
I rely on a well-trained mail server. The email address above is
genuine, and has been used on Usenet and various web-published forums
for more than eighteen years, and still only about half a dozen spams a
day make it to my mailbox. But things are improving, I only reject
about a hundred a day, and ten years ago it averaged more than a
thousand a day. My record was more than twelve thousand...
--
Joe
Reply to: